There is a silent but deeply rooted indignation that runs through the pews of many of our churches. A spiritual weariness at the spectacle of personal whims, of “anything goes,” and of liturgical audacity that confuses the altar with a lectern of one’s own making.

In light of this, Pope Leo XIV’s recent catechesis at his general audience on Wednesday, August 26, 2026, is not merely an academic reminder about the Second Vatican Council. It is a cry of alarm, a much-needed firewall, and a direct warning to those who infantilize or manipulate communal celebration. 

The temptation of self-importance and the disregard for the rights of the layperson

There is a profoundly unjust anomaly in daily ecclesial life. Scrupulous respect for the texts approved by episcopal conferences—carefully crafted tools that offer legitimate and broad options for pastoral creativity and closeness—clashes head-on with the desire for protagonism—even unintentionally—of some of those officiating. 

Parts of the prayers are invented, prayers are mutilated or extended, adaptations are improvised without the due and required institutional approval under the pretext of a supposed “inculturation” that no one has asked for or authorized. 

As a layperson, I witness this with legitimate and profound indignation. For here a fundamental right is being violated: the right of the faithful to celebrate the sacred mysteries as the Church has ordained them, with dignity, sobriety, and through common channels. 

The liturgy is not the private fiefdom of any priest, nor the testing ground for egocentric creativity. It belongs to the “whole body of the Church,” as the constitution  Sacrosanctum Concilium  (n. 26) reminds us. 

When the celebrant blatantly disregards the rules, he reduces the worshipper from an active member to a passive hostage of his aesthetic or ideological whims. 

The absurdity of the henhouse: what if we all did the same?

Having reached this point, it is worth asking an elementary question taken to the extreme of absurdity that some impose. 

What would happen if each faithful person attending liturgical celebrations decided on their own to do things differently because it gives them more devotion or because it seems to help them understand better what they are saying or doing? 

If we were to apply the principle of individual arbitrariness to the Church, the temple would immediately become a dreadful henhouse. If each attendee were to adapt the worship to their own whim under the guise of their subjectivity, the celebration would implode and the liturgy would completely lose its true essence. 

If the priest is allowed to alter texts and invent rites under the pretext of better connection, it opens the door for the sacred assembly to be reduced to an anarchic sum of uncommunicative monologues. 

The inalienable right of the layperson to have it celebrated “as God commands”

When the liturgy is carefully observed, it acquires a sublime tone that elevates the soul to God, naturally prompting greater and more fruitful attendance at Sunday and daily Holy Mass. 

As lay people, we possess sacred and inalienable rights within the heart of the ecclesial community. Among these, the right of justice to demand that the Eucharist be celebrated exactly “as God commands” stands out with particular force. 

We have the right to the rigorous and distinct offering of bread and wine; to the preservation of the true meaning of the lavabo and purification after the offertory; to the reverence shown for the secret prayers the priest whispers; and to the strict confinement of admonitions and warnings to their proper places, never becoming interminable monologues that hijack sacred time… 

Within this context, the excessive length of homilies has become another major obstacle to the liturgical calendar, despite repeated warnings from Pope Francis. The homiletic genre is not easy and demands thorough preparation, as was the practice of the Church Fathers, not mere improvisation. 

When the homily exceeds the prudent length—remembering that the Holy Father set a limit of fifteen minutes for Sundays, and that at daily Mass it should be either nonexistent or extraordinarily brief, lasting only two or three minutes—many faithful who make the daily effort to attend legitimately become nervous, and rightly so. They are being robbed of the real opportunity to remain for a few moments in silence after the Eucharist to give thanks to God for the gift received and for the Mass celebrated. 

Leo XIV against post-conciliar abuse

In his latest catechesis on liturgical reform, the Pope sought to clarify the matter. Recalling the foresight of then-Cardinal Giovanni Battista Montini in 1962, Leo XIV emphasized that the liturgy is language, a vehicle for divine teaching, and a channel for dialogue with God. He brooked no arbitrariness, for it would lose its intelligibility and its sacred power. 

The Pope has been relentless in pointing out the deviations of the post-conciliar era:  “A correct understanding of it also allows us to reject the abuses that have occurred in some sectors of the Church in the post-conciliar period, and which unfortunately may still occur today, absolutizing or misunderstanding some of the principles that were at the base of the reform itself .  “

How true these words are! 

The concept of “active participation” was used to justify the horizontal chaos, the breakdown of established norms, and the imposition of particular tastes that ultimately stifle the mystery. Renewal was confused with trivialization. 

Noble simplicity versus disorder

Faced with this liturgical occurrence, the Church demands of its pastors —bishops and priests— the sacred responsibility of safeguarding a liturgy that shines with its “noble simplicity”. 

The texts are there, validated after years of study and ecclesial wisdom, offering a wealth of liturgical options more than sufficient for any sensible pastoral approach. There’s no need to reinvent the wheel every Sunday, nor to resort to a cheap, superficial inculturation to connect with people. What connects is truth, rigor, and respect. 

Towards a horizon of hope: when good deeds fill the temples

Fortunately, despite these embers of arbitrariness, breaths of fresh air are blowing through our communities and these abuses and improvised “new customs” are becoming less and less frequent. 

Reality is stubborn and luminous. When the liturgy is celebrated with fidelity, love, and meticulousness—graciously heeding what my mother so wisely defined, recalling the instructions printed in red in the Missal:  “the honest priest always does what’s ‘red'” —the pastoral results are not long in coming. 

Experience irrefutably demonstrates that when the altar is cared for and respected for what it is, the church fills with worshippers eager for transcendence. Conversely, where it is trivialized and personal whims prevail, the pews languish and empty. 

The liturgy is the primary source of God’s life, not a showcase for the ego of the moment. It is urgent to definitively recover liturgical modesty and return to the people what is rightfully theirs: a conscious, devout, active, and, above all, faithful celebration.